well, here we must also remind that if we talk about there, there were still dugouts, uh, there was even less destruction, even closer, there were also animals, and they were quite close to the epicenter, they used, of course, they were no longer residents, but they survived, well, here we must also take into account to be frank that at that time technology was not yet so electronic and now we probably have to talk about the fact that this is this radiation, hard radiation, electromagnetic gamma radiation, it will definitely disable the electric well, i don't think that it will be drastic, but there will be a failure therefore, well, military equipment, electronics on military equipment, at least before it was protected from e-e influence, that is, and now we do not know whether just a commercial machine will go,

well, i don't know. at least, i think there may be problems with it going through electronics, but military equipment, of course. it can be protected, in fact, the zone affected by such an explosion was a corner. and this is twice as much as in hiroshima and nagasaki, even more than twice. well, we see that it is possible to destroy a battalion tactical group if it a compact one is located. well, to destroy it, to make it non-combatable, well, fuel for losses - it is not combat-capable, well, we see it. well, to say that it is something, er, something like that, we certainly cannot change the course of the war, well, that is, we are talking about that in fact tactical nuclear weapons in the format of these warnings actually have such a variant of political pressure from the point of view of military use, their usefulness is quite limited if

we say that there is one munition for one battalion group there for a line there brigades there you will have to use several and in general, then the situation becomes where it is a bit strange that the effects of these nuclear weapons are actually equal to the effects of some more powerful high-precision commercial weapons , you can even then assess these risks well, yes, and if there was now a war in the style of the second world war, you know the front to the front e there are defense lines dugouts concrete metal then there really is one aspect - this is a defense breakthrough if it is impossible to destroy the defense line there other than as a nuclear weapon because of this and such tests of a nuclear explosion were carried out then the troops pass through the epicenter, that is, they break through and there is another option. if the offensive is carried out in such echelons, then in the second echelons at their stage, when they are crowded before the offensive, there are

also strikes to stop it, well, now it is simply very difficult, there is nothing like that, there really are certain fortifications, the russians pour concrete in certain certain areas, but it is not the concrete that requires destruction, that is, with the help of nuclear weapons, so really if the russians use it on vot, it is a demonstration either in the fields or in the water area or they will try to demonstrate a certain breakthrough or defense there on the battlefield, we will read about it through russian telegram channels. all of them will be there to report that something drastic has happened , they will actually see it there, well, explain it to those who were there before that, i think, after all, now e- the main idea, if putin has it, is the use of nuclear weapons, it is demonstrative, it will be something to be seen and felt and changed.

it broke the will of our partners to help us. of course, they don't talk much, but it's true, there is a global nuclear order in the world, it's not one, uh, one specific document - it's a whole series, of course, the non-proliferation treaty is at the heart of it, but there are a lot of different political documents that create a certain regime, that is, a regime in the field of nuclear weapons this regime, which is more correct to call the global nuclear order, consists in the fact that nuclear countries are not forever, nuclear countries use nuclear weapons only to clarify relations between themselves. well, of course, nuclear weapons are not can be used for colonial conquests,

it’s just uh, if it was like that, if it was meant to be and no one would sign this proliferation treaty. and it must be said. it seems that 195 countries have signed it today. well, almost 200 countries, of which only five are officially nuclear and of the rest of the non-nuclear ones, they are non-nuclear not because they can't make nuclear weapons . once upon a time, it was true that those who could make them were made, but now those countries have given up on nuclear weapons and continue to refuse refuse for the sake of the future of this planet, so that there are no such huge risks and the world develops, but if we are talking about the fact that nuclear weapons are used to seize territory, then of course the refusal cannot be voluntary and

we will see after the use of nuclear weapons any combat combat use e - it's not just tests, we will see that in 5-10 years dozens of nuclear countries will appear, well, maybe dozens will appear within five years, five more will appear within 10 there will be a dozen, and by the end of the century half of the countries will be nuclear. that is , all the obligations that were destroyed, if russia uses nuclear weapons, it will not happen for a week or two and it will seem that russia has achieved something. but in the first few years it will become clear that russia has lost its last exclusivity, which it had little exclusivity for nuclear weapons will turn out to be japan, south korea, etc. we do not know. i think that if ukraine survives, it will also become nuclear because, in this case, the use of nuclear weapons

by russia, because there are no past commitments will act and this will also change our attitude to such a weapon once it is used. well, why ? simply, no one knows what will happen after this if this global global nuclear order collapses, and russia is actually afraid of it, and it is precisely because of these fears that such strange steps are taken by annexation, so that make blackmail convincing and try to eliminate it within the framework of this global nuclear order, which assumes that a nuclear country can defend itself, but it cannot wage colonial wars with the help of nuclear weapons and now russia is trying to make sure that it is defending its own territory and not seizing another, so what will happen well, of course , no one will believe russia if it applies

disarmament, no one will verify that it is defending its territory and order will be destroyed, but still , that's it putin is so resolute and how long he talks about it that 3% should still be left on. it is absurd that he does not dare to do something like this. so when we talk about what from the paid states and european countries of nato there must be an adequate response to putin's nuclear blackmail, and in fact, this response is aimed , among other things, at restraining and securing the nuclear order so that the world would be safer. nato must provide an answer. and here the question of the answer is divided into two components, usually such a political one, when these warnings are blurred and the more blurred they are, the more they can be said to provide a maneuver for the implementation of further warnings in

in the format of specific actions, there are more specific statements that are beginning to be announced by the representatives of the military elite of the united states of the second order, peter , you will agree on the specific steps that the united states will take in the event of the use of nuclear weapons by russia. the political track is there, sally ivan is the president, and then the second track is specific military people who say that this and that will be done, and what happens to the aggressor usually happens together with political determination under such a realistic, and those options that are currently being voiced by the usa and nato are realistic and they are based on the fact that there are enough non-nuclear means of

response to such aggression, in general, here is what i said about the global nuclear order, its idea is to be the first to use nuclear weapons it will ultimately lose strategically, and therefore neither the united states nor nato will try to be the first to use nuclear weapons. although they have the means to respond adequately, that is, on the same level as russia, but what is more or less, this consensus follows from the statements that are made, well, mainly from the united states, they say that the answer will be, uh, not a nuclear pace, and you can understand why. what to look at this whole history of nuclear blackmail on the part of russia in the last months, at the beginning of this phase of the war, they they had one aspect that was really quite successful for russia, this blackmail, starting with the

famous speech of putin reprinting the war, when he said that do not dare to help ukraine, otherwise you will see consequences that you did not see in your history, well, this is a frank hint of nuclear weapons, and yet it had an effect, and we heard constant statements that no, no, nato will never fight directly , but if on the territory of nato, well, then already then there will already be a real war in russia as well managed to restrain all our partners from direct participation in this war er and it more or less worked, but if was not deterred

by the use of nuclear weapons well, then forgive me there are no restraints on and there are no restrictions on the participation of those who want to help ukraine directly in this war. and it is very important to directly participate in this war. i also saw such estimates from the united states and nato in the spring that this is the invasion of russia, well, with the same coefficient. how was the invasion of deirozor in syria, when they destroyed the wagner group in 15 minutes? well, let's say two uh, two weeks, so that the aviation of nato countries, in a mass application, destroyed all the troops e-e russia in to ukraine well, that's why russia will still choose defeat after defeat or even more likely defeat in the event of the use of nuclear

weapons when all restrictions on forms of aid to ukraine will disappear. and that's enough, and then if russia tries to stop it is a more powerful nuclear weapon, then the so-called escalation steps will automatically be turned on. if these nuclear explosions on the territory of ukraine will affect other countries on their own scale, then there is an escalation to a global nuclear war, which is very similar to putin, after all, he wants to because he wants to live, he believes in nuclear weapons as such a tool, a tool that gives him victory, but not a tool that brings the situation to global death, he, i think, perfectly understands that he will die just like the others in this war and there no one who plays doesn't get there, and even more so , the one who first used nuclear

weapons will not go to heaven, that's why this is deterrence, i think it works. i think the russian military is still used to explaining what the consequences might be, and they certainly can't convey this to their top political leadership but all the same, the irrationality is higher than the poetic leadership of russia, well, there is such a probability that it is absolutely irrational in this matter, that is, when we talk about the fact that russia is blackmailing europe there with the use of nuclear weapons, that is why they say that they do not supply attackers, do not supply tanks, do not supply planes, it is actually an echo of this blackmail, but the main thing is that it affects .

now hmm, now we hear and constantly hear and now we hear with particularity these statements that if the united states supplies something to ukraine, especially, then this will be considered direct participation of the united states in the war, it is not like the possibility of using nuclear weapons and but all my life on the situation why is it now another escalation from my point of view i do not claim to hmm absolutely there knowledge or any insiders but from what i see well open sources now this new stage of the war has started are already talking and talking approximately for a month, the united states, as a country of

fanatics , has been waiting for a new stage of the war to begin. logistics and not allow them to advance, now while he is on the assembly, what kind of destruction of troops is a slightly different weapon? in order to carry out an offensive well, let's not talk about the military aspect, military experts know that something is changing there, what is needed now and what is needed now less. it is necessary from what was before, and at this stage of the discussion, what weapons are needed now for the gradual liberation of ukrainian territories from the russians and brought up this topic, a new aggravation around nuclear weapons was also exactly what happened in april and changed, faded away, so in may, and then they didn't remember, they didn't remember, and now again, in april

, it was like that when when the issues of mass such a supply of weapons that ukraine needs and in september this issue was resolved in a different way. this should be taken seriously, but somehow here he said about one more thing if they are here we talked from the beginning about the fact that one day russia will be forced to use nuclear weapons if it loses here it may not be true now we see a certain corridor which for russia, its opportunities are narrowing, it enters this corridor, goes, goes, and here they say at the end of this corridor, they will use nuclear weapons

if they will be driven through this corridor, but the fact is that no one knows, some of you know this corridor , it just narrows and narrows and at a certain stage it will simply become so narrow that putin's hand will not be able to reach nuclear weapons and that there will be no red lines in the head of the russians, you see, there is no such distance in this corridor where such a red line could to say if we pass this red line uh then russia will use as a non-weapon in fact they will simply narrow the opportunities for russia they are narrowing and narrowing and there we already see it now we feel it from certain hints of hints of international about a possible reaction and they i think with a certain of sometimes even more frankly, they say that if russia just loses this war, it’s just unpleasant, but it’s just greedy, it

loses so uh, putin’s regime will surely collapse , but it’s not the end of russia, it can be a little uh there endure and start a new life, but if russia uses nuclear weapons and after using nuclear weapons, it will still lose, but it will still lose, as we now understand, after this defeat of russia, the world will treat it much more harshly, as such a threat that exists in general for the world and when, in such a situation, certain regions of russia begin to declare their sovereignty, the outside world may support it if, if russia does not use nuclear weapons, it will not be pushed to disintegration. well, we have the impression that the discussion that is currently taking place in the international arena, that is, if russia does not use nuclear weapons, it

will simply lose there with the regime, there are certain problems. to the collapse of russia itself, but if russia uses nuclear weapons in this war, it will mean that when there is uh, they will knock it to the ground and they will finish it off. so that putin is using nuclear weapons, he can just see there or those people who will rule russia will see a completely different perspective. therefore, i still remain on this 3% civilian use of nuclear weapons. your conclusions and assessments are quite interesting to you, and then i have a question. when are we there? we are reading the british times there. where it is written, a new train with nuclear munitions is heading towards the border of ukraine.

tests will be held there, i am not there. somewhere there it is heading to the shores of america or britain, that is, in fact, then we get involved in this game with the nuclear old age that the russian federation actually imposes on us. and we actually play along with this concept of intimidation . they said that there are probably 12 conditions that exploit nuclear weapons. well, here it is simply necessary to explain why it is so important that somewhere the transport went to the point that all the nuclear weapons that are now in the united states and in russia. well , the agreements are valid, they are not all legal, but very important political what is strategic nuclear

weapons what is needed for strategic war and the destruction of the world and the destruction of countries it is in the high table of the degree of readiness on the m inhabitants of political missiles and close to airfields and strategic bombers it is more or less bigoted even it is there let's say 1500 from each of each side eh but but it is not aimed at any target right now the world ocean eh if in case of eh there is a technical failure it will fly eh into the ocean that is there will be no global war of course, it is very easy to retarget there, it is a procedure there, well, a flash drive is a flash drive and that's all, but on the other hand, if within the framework of those treaties between the united

states and russia there is a message, constant messages about a change in the status of the armed forces, both countries are interested in this, the united states wants to know what is happening in russia with these nuclear forces and the russians are also like that they want to know there are these reports and that is why there is a certain regime that does not allow it to be violated no one wants to cross this border well good russia will really target to the united states, these weapons will stop reporting those reports, it is necessary to say hundreds of them per year, uh, uh, you understand there, uh, the mine was opened for the regulation about this message, there is only one exception for strategic bombers , welcome, so you can say that always when it flies ha101 well, there is less it is known in what condition it is flying, but still, it is also possible to understand more or less, after all, they are not permanently equipped with a nuclear weapon, but in the end, the rest of the strategic nuclear

force is controlled in this way. that is, we have understand that there is a certain control that no country wants to violate in relation to tactical nuclear weapons in 1991, there is such a regime that it is generally removed from the ground forces, in other branches of the military , it is stored in central hm e-e in central e-e storages on the central bases and therefore and in order to use nuclear weapons here, i really frankly do not know, this is a very interesting question , which armed forces do the iskanders belong to, are they ground troops or not? if they are ground troops , that is, we must understand what this means if ground forces and iskanders are assigned, they were preparing for nuclear missions, maybe it is, but if they were preparing, it does not mean that the entire infrastructure of the ground forces, it again has certain nuclear missions, there is a certain preparation and appropriate

planning by the commands in all these aspects, i think about it, the united states knew, i did not hear what did they say about it? that is, we are here, even definitively, we know whether they can shoot from the kander or what they are intended for. but we do not know at any moment when from the central warehouses any transport goes towards certain military formations, be it air force or navy, navy or ground forces, eh, it means that a tactical nuclear strike is being prepared, then he can’t, even if he had such a button that automatically triggers something, he can’t use it yet nuclear weapons are located on aging bases in the united states as well, and russia really does not want to create such a situation that

american ships with nuclear weapons do not enter the baltic sea, now they do not enter because of these old agreements er, with the soviet union confirmed by russia that on surface ships in the ground forces and in tactical aviation, nuclear weapons close to use will not be used, they will be in central warehouses and personal ones, and well, there will not be at all, that is, there is a certain pause before use and when this there appears a publication in the times or in political publications where it is said that we are increasing the number of means that monitor russian storage facilities, then this is actually this element of such a secret dialogue where the two sides are trying to warn each other that we are following and we are doing or not doing somewhere, this is how it happens. well, plus , plus, yes, the form in which it happens is due to the

outpouring of social networks. this is the pressure, i perceive this psychological pressure, the information operations around nuclear weapons, their use, i perceive as such a strange form, such an unusual form of negotiation proposals from the side and they write in this way, i want to say well, what they always say, i want to say again say stop the offensive and give us our decision, they can call it a victory, will it stop or let's tax the state of the front line, let's agree on something. does not happen through the means of technical intelligence and agency intelligence in relation to these central colors of storage of nuclear weapons, everything

else - these are psychological operations and here is the only aspect that should be paid attention to after all, the russians manage to convey certain of their messages on social networks, e.e. on telegram, and if larry the public and de time write something, it means that the russians have such an opportunity to convey this scandalous scandalous information component to certain lines, e.e., to certain levels of information policy western countries this is important and i think this is the most practical aspect that we have to study in this matter in what way they still bring this horror to the level of european politics and american politics they still

they report such a horror, it is precisely this message that the posidon underwater torpedo is working, which there is due to a nuclear detonation due to a tsunami from washing the coast of the united states there, and of course it went all over the media, there began to be comments and such other uh, does this poseidon exist at all, about whom uh, there was so much talk well, i will remind you, there was such a one, we had such a uh, the head of the sbu, leonid derkach, he once wrote such a very interesting little book about how the kdb conducted psychological operations before the collapse of the soviet union when the union was trying to stop it there, it was not told about red mercury, but if someone wants to read what red mercury is and what kind of horror it created in 1991, they can read uh, it’s there. i think this booklet also

wrote about such as the basing of the nuclear at the bottom of the ocean and all that, what i am talking about here and what is rational here, really, when andriy sakharov was still in charge of the nuclear project, he had the idea that if a super-powerful explosion in the sea could cause a tsunami and it was then that he found uh, the option of how to make such a powerful munition there, 50 megatons, 100 m ot. when it became clear that it was possible, he had such ideas , and indeed in the soviet union, the study of this and that subject was launched. there is such and such a laboratory, and the study of waves, how they are created, well, i studied this question , and it was found out that in order to create a tsunami, in fact